Doxpop submits 798-page request for access to public information from Indiana Courts

On Friday, January 9, 2009, Doxpop shipped off its 798-page 2009 AR-9(F) request (pdf) for access to non-confidential case information in Indiana. Doxpop works with county clerks and judges to publish information about court cases on the Internet as permitted by Trial Rule 77(K) (html). Bulk access to court case information is governed by Administrative Rule 9(F) (html) and certain administrative authority under the rule is granted to the Division of State Court Administration, Lilia Judson, Executive Director.

In addition to a cover letter and a few pages of information specific to our request, the Division requires that we attach: 1) orders of consent from judges in each county from which we receive information, 2) copies of contracts with each county from which we receive information, and 3) copies of contracts with anyone to whom we provide bulk data. With about 50 counties participating in the Doxpop network, and 5 other organizations that receive bulk data via Doxpop, the paperwork adds up quickly.

But wait, there's more. There's another 4000 pages to submit before January 31. Each county that utilizes Doxpop to publish information on the Internet under TR-77(K) must also submit its own paperwork to the Division. This includes: 1) orders of consent from the judges in the county, 2) a copy of the contract with the county, and 3) detailed information about the Doxpop service and its user agreements. This adds up to about 80 pages per county. To facilitate the process, Doxpop prepares this paperwork for submission by the clerk.

It's worth noting that the consent orders and contracts in each TR-77(K) request are identical to the ones submitted by Doxpop in its AR-9(F) request. And the information about the Doxpop services is identical in each TR-77(K) request. All of this needs to be completed between January 1 and January 31: new consent orders from the judges, new AR-9(F) request from Doxpop, approval by the Division of Doxpop's request, and new TR-77(K) requests by each clerk. All of this at a busy time of year, especially for judges and clerks who just took office.

As you can see from the cover letter, Doxpop has some concerns about how the Division has chosen to interpret the rules. I'll say more about that in upcoming blog entries. For now I'll suggest that the current process is poorly designed, at best, or designed to frustrate clerks, judges, and counties who have not switched to the state-provided case management system, at worst. In the letter sent to clerks last year (pdf), the second paragraph seems to imply the latter.

Of course we comply with the process prescribed by the Division, but surely there's a better way.

Ray

Indiana Court Announces Bulk Data Direction

The Indiana Supreme Court, Division of State Court Administration has declared its intentions with regard to bulk access to public information about court cases stored in its own system. The statement of direction is short on details but better than no statement at all, I suppose. Doxpop and others have requested access to the public information and we're eager to get something workable in place.

Today I received a letter from Jim Walker, Director of Trial Court Management. It states that the Division is exploring how to make bulk data available in a uniform manner from the state-sponsored case management system, Odyssey. The cost, format, and frequency of publication is not yet determined. No timetable is given for completion of their analysis or for providing the data.

Doxpop has been corresponding with the Division for over a year-and-a-half with regard to accessing bulk data from the Odyssey system. On January 29, 2007 we sent a formal request to Mary DePrez, Director and Counsel for Trial Court Technology, asking to begin collaboration on the exchange of public information with the Odyssey system. On October 25, 2007 we sent a formal request to Lilia Judson, Executive Director of State Court Administration, for access to Monroe County court information in anticipation of Monroe County switching over to the Odyssey system. Nearly 19 months have passed since our original request for collaboration, and 10 months since our specific request for access to public information from Monroe County.

Although I am encouraged by the statement of direction, I hope that the Division and the Judicial Technology and Automation Committee (JTAC) can move more quickly on completing its analysis and actually providing access than it has in considering the very idea of bulk access to public information.

Access delayed is access denied.

What we learned in Bloomington.

Last week, Ray and I traveled to Bloomington to learn for ourselves how Odyssey is working out. We came back with a clear understanding that although it may have potential, the task of making Odyssey ready for roll out to other Indiana courts is not done. From every person we talked to, we learned that the public access falls short of the standards Doxpop previously established in Monroe County, and from one, we learned that the Clerk's office works harder to maintain records in this CMS than with the previous system.

Doxpop stands ready to assist in one aspect of this task... On January 27, 2007, Doxpop requested access to a regular data feed from the Odyssey system per our existing authorization from the Courts of Monroe County. We were quickly told that in the new environment, the County Courts no longer control who has access to their data. Therefore, we had to submit a request to the Division of State Court Administration instead. This request was submitted on October 25, 2007. We're still waiting.

JTAC has excellent goals. Doxpop stands ready to help. Tomorrow, I'll talk a little more about the goals of JTAC and how companies in Indiana can help them achieve their goals.